Types of Arguments Inductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to prove that the conclusion is probably true. Strong.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

TRUTH TABLES The general truth tables for each of the connectives tell you the value of any possible statement for each of the connectives. Negation.

Advertisements

PHILOSOPHY 101 Maymester 2007 Day 2 Logic and Knowledge.

Deduction and Induction Elementary deduction, my dear Watson…

1 Valid and Invalid arguments. 2 Definition of Argument Sequence of statements: Statement 1; Statement 2; Therefore, Statement 3. Statements 1 and 2 are.

Lecture 2: Deduction, Induction, Validity, Soundness.

Arguments, validity, soundness, persuasiveness

1.4 Validity, Truth, Soundness, Strength and Cogency Goal: Learn the terms used to evaluate inductive and deductive arguments.

Reason & Argument Lecture 3. Lecture Synopsis 1. Recap: validity, soundness & counter- examples, induction. 2. Arguing for a should conclusion. 3. Complications.

Use a truth table to determine the validity or invalidity of this argument. First, translate into standard form “Martin is not buying a new car, since.

Deductive Validity Truth preserving: The conclusion logically follows from the premises. It is logically impossible for the premises to be true and the.

Moral Reasoning   What is moral reasoning? Moral reasoning is ordinary critical reasoning or critical thinking applied to moral arguments.

2 Basic Types of Reasoning Deductive Deductive Inductive Inductive.

Debate. Inductive Reasoning When you start with a probable truth, and seek evidence to support it. Most scientific theories are inductive. Evidence is.

Philosophy 103 Linguistics 103 Yet, still, even further more, expanded, Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking Dr. Robert Barnard.

LESSON 3: PRACTICE WITH VALID/INVALID; MORE ON INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS Logic.

Other Info on Making Arguments

2 Basic Types of Reasoning Deductive Deductive Inductive Inductive.

Deduction and Induction

Reasoning Automated Deduction. Reasonable Arguments Argument: An attempt to demonstrate the truth of a conclusion from the truth of a set of premises.

Essential Deduction Techniques of Constructing Formal Expressions and Evaluating Attempts to Create Valid Arguments.

For Friday, read chapter 2, sections 1-2 (pp ). As nongraded homework, do the problems on p. 19. Graded homework #1 is due at the beginning of class.

Essential Deduction Techniques of Constructing Formal Expressions Evaluating Attempts to Create Valid Arguments.

CSSE442 Computer Security – March 12, 2007 Tools for Evaluating Cyberethics Issues Ad Hominem Argument Slippery Slope Argument Fallacy of Appeal to Authority.

1 Arguments in Philosophy Introduction to Philosophy.

Debate. Inductive Reasoning When you start with a probable truth, and seek evidence to support it. Most scientific theories are inductive. Evidence is.

Moral Reasoning   What is moral reasoning? Moral reasoning is ordinary critical reasoning or critical thinking applied to moral arguments.

DEDUCTIVE & INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS

Basic Argumentation.

Deduction, Induction, & Truth Kareem Khalifa Department of Philosophy Middlebury College.

Logic and Philosophy Alan Hausman PART ONE Sentential Logic Sentential Logic.

Deductive versus Inductive Reasoning Consider the following two passages: Argument #1 Mr. Jones is a member of the Academy of Scholarly Fellows and only.

9/20/12 BR- Who are the 3 Argument Brothers (from yesterday) Today: How to Argue (Part 1) MIKVA!!

Unit 1D Analyzing Arguments. TWO TYPES OF ARGUMENTS Inductive Deductive Arguments come in two basic types:

Deductive vs. Inductive Logic This course is about deductive logic. But it is important to know something about inductive logic.

Reasoning and Critical Thinking Validity and Soundness 1.

10/20/09 BR- Who are the three “brothers” of Argument? Today: Constructing A Logical Argument – Deductive and Inductive Reasoning -Hand in “facts” -MIKVA.

Question of the Day!  We shared a lot of examples of illogical arguments!  But how do you make a LOGICAL argument? What does your argument need? What.

Chapter 3: MAKING SENSE OF ARGUMENTS

Argument Diagramming Part II PHIL 121: Methods of Reasoning February 1, 2013 Instructor:Karin Howe Binghamton University.

10/21/09 BR- Identify the (1)premises and the (2)conclusion in the following deductive argument. Is it valid or invalid? All fish need gills to breath.

The construction of a formal argument

Deductive and induction reasoning

Propositions and Arguments. What is a proposition? A proposition is a predicative sentence that only contains a subject and a predicate S is P.

Validity, Soundness, Strength, Cogency Jason Chang Critical Thinking.

09/17/07 BR- What is “logic?” What does it mean to make a logical argument? Today: Logic and How to Argue (Part 1)

UOP CRT 205 Week 7 Assignment Argument Evaluation Check this A+ tutorial guideline at

PHIL102 SUM2014, M-F12:00-1:00, SAV 264 Instructor: Benjamin Hole

Types of Arguments Inductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to prove that the conclusion is probably true. Strong.

Chapter 3 Basic Logical Concepts (Please read book.)

Revisiting the Toulmin Model and its Greek Predecessors

Basic Logic Definitions

Introduction to Logic PHIL 240 Sections

Philosophy and Logic The Process of Correct Reasoning

Validity and Soundness

Making Sense of Arguments

Thinking Critically Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc.

Logic Problems and Questions

Validity & Invalidity Valid arguments guarantee true conclusions but only when all of their premises are true Invalid arguments do not guarantee true conclusions.

Critical Thinking Lecture 2 Arguments

Logical Fallacies.

8C Truth Tables, 8D, 8E Implications 8F Valid Arguments

Patterns of Informal Non-Deductive Logic (Ch. 6)

Propositional Logic 1) Introduction Copyright 2008, Scott Gray.

ID1050– Quantitative & Qualitative Reasoning

Evaluating Deductive Arguments

If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.

If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.

Presentation transcript:

Types of Arguments Inductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to prove that the conclusion is probably true. Strong Inductive Argument: An inductive argument in which the truth of the premises really does prove that the conclusion is probably true.

Weak Inductive Argument: An inductive argument in which the truth of the premises really does not prove that the conclusion is probably true. Cogent Argument: A strong inductive argument in which all the premises are actually true. Uncogent Argument: A strong inductive argument in which even one premise is actually false.

Determining Whether an Inductive Argument is Strong or Weak 1)Assume all the premises are true, even if one or more is clearly false. 2.Using only the information in the premises plus common knowledge ask: What is the probability that the conclusion is true? Above 50%: Strong Argument 50% or Less: Weak Argument

Examples Most recording artists have talent. Britney Spears is a recording artist. Therefore, Britney probably has talent. This argument is strong. Britney Spears is a recording artist. Britney has blonde hair. Therefore, most recording artists have blonde hair. This argument is weak.

Most boys like to play sports. Britney Spears is a boy. Therefore, Britney probably likes to play sports. This argument is strong but uncogent. The first argument is cogent as well as strong.

Deductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to necessitate the truth of the the conclusion, i. e. if all the premises are true, the conclusion has to be true. Valid Deductive Argument: A deductive argument in which the truth of the premises really does necessitate the truth of the conclusion, i. e. it’s NOT possible for all the premises to be true and the conclusion still be false.

Invalid Deductive Argument: A deductive argument in which the truth of the premises really does not necessitate the truth of the conclusion, i. e. it’s possible for all the premises to be true and the conclusion still be false. Sound Argument: A valid deductive argument in which all the premises are actually true. Unsound Argument: A valid deductive argument in which even one premise is actually false.

Determining Whether a Deductive Argument is Valid or Invalid 1)Assume all the premises are true, even if one or more is clearly false. 2)Using only the information in the premises plus common knowledge ask: Does the conclusion have to be true? Yes: Valid Argument No: Invalid Argument

N.B.: An argument is invalid if it’s possible for all the premises to be true while the conclusion is false. N.B.: Whether an argument is valid or invalid depends solely on its form NOT its content.

Examples If Barack Obama is President of the USA, then Michelle Obama is First Lady. Barack is President of the USA. Therefore, Michelle is First Lady. This argument is valid. Material Implication: The truth of the antecedent (A) is sufficient by itself for the truth of the consequent (B).

If A, then B. A. Therefore, B. A’s being true makes B true. A is true. So, B is also true. If Abraham Lincoln died of cancer, then Lincoln is dead today. Lincoln is dead today. Therefore, Abraham Lincoln died of cancer. (This argument is invalid.)

If A, then B. B. Therefore, A. Counter-Example: A way to show that an argument form is invalid. It’s an argument in the which the all the premises are clearly true and the conclusion is clearly false.

If the moon is made of green cheese, then astronauts can eat moon rocks. The moon is made of green cheese. Therefore, astronauts can eat moon rocks. If A, then B. A. Therefore, B. This argument is valid but unsound.